While other federal candidates and party committees file electronic
campaign finance reports that are promptly posted on, and downloadable
from, the Internet, Senate ones file on paper using snail mail. Then an
outside contractor takes weeks to hand-enter the data back into an
electronic database. In its February 20th editorial, the Capitol Hill
newspaper Roll Call castigated the Senate process as "so cumbersome and
slow that watchdog groups, the media and the public can't find out
who's giving and who's getting until weeks after key votes and
elections—not within 24 hours as is the case with the House and
others."

The editorial pointed out that although Senators Russell Feingold (D-WI), Thad Cochran (R-MS) and 26 of their bipartisan
colleagues have sponsored S. 223, the Senate Disclosure Parity Act, the Rules Committee chaired by co-sponsor Dianne
Feinstein (D-CA) has not yet scheduled a hearing or markup. Corrective legislation has now been pending for more than
three years.

The editorial concluded that "The only way to prove that Democrats, as well as Republicans, don’t favor
perpetuation of the indefensible is to move on this bill, and soon."

The editorial follows:

Roll Call
February 20, 2007

Editorial: Indefensible

Congress has passed legislation requiring lobbyists to report
electronically what they spend to influence lawmakers. House Members
and candidates, along with House and national party committees, have
been required to report contributions and expenditures electronically
since 2001 and independent 527 political committees since 2003.

What's missing here? The Senate. Senators, Senate
candidates and Senate campaign committees still report on paper, and
the process is so cumbersome and slow that watchdog groups, the media
and the public can't find out who's giving and who's getting until
weeks after key votes and elections - not within 24 hours, as is the
case with the House and others.

The Senate process would be comical if it weren't so
purposefully deceptive. Senate campaigns and committees are fully
computerized, but instead of downloading their data to the Federal
Election Commission, they print their records out and mail them to the
Office of the Secretary of the Senate. That alone wastes several days
past the required filing time. Then, the Secretary's office scans each
page back into digital images to be e-mailed to the FEC.

There, the files are downloaded, printed and collated.
Last year, the Los Angeles Times reported, Senate Democrats' reports
consumed 5,487 pages and Republican reports, 4,650 pages - nine to 11
hours' worth of printing time at the FEC.

But wait, we're not done yet. The back-on-paper files
are then couriered to Fredericksburg, Va., where a private contractor,
ILM Corp., employs workers to type the information back into a computer
- costing taxpayers $250,000 per year. The information is then
transmitted electronically back to the FEC for posting on the Internet.

At long last, contribution data is available for study
and categorizing on Web sites such as PoliticalMoneyLine and
OpenSecrets.org. But it's weeks late and expenditure data never gets
posted.

Sens. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.)
first introduced legislation to change this ridiculous system in 2003.
It didn't happen, according to Steve Weissman of the Campaign Finance
Institute, because now-Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
blocked it. The Louisville Courier-Journal reported that McConnell
argued he didn't want nosy watchdogs and opponents to be able to type
in a search for "Enron" and find out instantly who received
contributions from the disgraced energy giant.

Feingold is back again with S. 223, now joined by Sen.
Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) as chief sponsor along with 26 others, including
McCain. The bill has been referred to the Senate Rules and
Administration Committee, and its chairwoman, Sen. Dianne Feinstein
(D-Calif.), has endorsed the bill. Yet no hearing or markup is
scheduled.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) says he's for
reform, but when Feingold offered his bill as an amendment to lobbying
reform legislation, Reid rejected it as a non-germane "campaign finance
reform measure," even though candidate travel aboard corporate jets was
covered in the bill. The only way to prove that Democrats, as well as
Republicans, don't favor perpetuation of the indefensible is to move on
this bill, and soon.